KEY DEVELOPMENTS: Testimony from three more accusers Thursday included some of the most graphic details of the trial's four days and gave the term "tickle monster" a dark, almost nefarious meaning. Jurors heard one accuser say he spent more than 100 nights at Jerry Sandusky's home, sleeping on a waterbed in a basement room he thought was soundproof because no one heard him scream when he was assaulted. Another accuser told jurors Sandusky called himself the "tickle monster" before embracing him in a shower.
ODDS AND ENDS: A small group of family and friends has been sitting near Sandusky during the trial this week save for one key figure, his wife, Dottie Sandusky. Her absence has been noted, but it's not a sign of her sentiment toward her husband or an attempt to avoid the testimony that has taken place. She's not allowed to be in the court. Judge John Cleland asked that those who will testify to be sequestered from the courtroom, and she's on the defense team's witness list and could be called next week.
WHAT'S NEXT: A three-day weekend. The court has recessed, but prosecutors have not rested their case, which means they could still call more witnesses on Monday. Sandusky lawyer Joe Amendola said "I think we'll start Monday," signaling that if the prosecution rests at the start of next week, the judge is not likely to delay the next phase of the trial.
Q: WHAT ARE THE CHARGES?
A: Sandusky is charged with 52 counts of child sex abuse involving 10 alleged victims over a 15-year span dating back to the mid-1990s. The charges are 11 counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, nine counts of indecent assault, 10 counts of unlawful contact with a minor, 10 counts of corruption of minors, 10 counts of endangering a child's welfare, one count of aggravated indecent assault and one count of attempted indecent assault.
Q: IF SANDUSKY IS CONVICTED, WHAT KIND OF PUNISHMENT COULD HE RECEIVE?
A: If the jury finds him guilty of all charges, the maximum possible sentence would add up to about 500 years.
Q: WHO ARE HIS ACCUSERS? WHAT DO THEY HAVE IN COMMON?
A: The eight known accusers, who now range in age from 18 to 28, met Sandusky through The Second Mile, a charity he founded for helping children from troubled or single-parent families. Their testimony described how Sandusky bought them gifts, took them to football games and had them stay in a spare bedroom in his home for overnight sleepovers. Investigators say they don't know the identities of the two other alleged victims.
Q: HOW HAS SANDUSKY EXPLAINED HIS ACTIONS?
A: Sandusky has acknowledged publicly that he "horsed around" with young boys, showered with them after workouts, hugged them and had other physical contact but said he never acted with sexual intent. He said in interviews after his arrest that he is not a pedophile but in retrospect realizes that he should not have showered with the boys.
Q: WHAT COULD BE EXPECTED FROM THE DEFENSE TEAM?
A: In his opening statement to the jury, defense attorney Joseph Amendola said the accusers' allegations are flimsy and suggested that some of them have a financial stake in the outcome because they want to sue Sandusky and others. During cross-examination, Amendola also tried to undermine the credibility of the young men, as well as former football team assistant Mike McQueary, who testified seeing Sandusky naked in a shower with a boy in 2001.
Amendola also suggested some of his client's interactions with boys are not indicative of pedophilia but of histrionic personality disorder, a condition in which someone behaves in a dramatic fashion to get attention. It's unknown if Sandusky will testify in his own defense or whether his wife, Dottie, will take the stand in support of her husband.
Q: WHY IS THERE NO LIVE-TWEETING OR VIDEO COVERAGE OF THE TRIAL?
A: Judge John Cleland, who was brought in from a county 80 miles away to preside over the proceedings, barred reporters from sending any electronic transmission from inside the courtroom or a nearby media center where dozens of reporters are watching the proceedings. The restriction is not unusual in Pennsylvania courtrooms.
Also, Pennsylvania Supreme Court regulations prohibit all types of cameras and broadcasting equipment in courtrooms during criminal proceedings. The rules give judges in the state's appellate courts discretion to allow cameras, but only in nonjury, civil proceedings.